| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 6543 2011 SLD 6543 2011 PCRLJ 966 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 90 of 2009, decided on 8th February, 2011.Date of hearing: 8th February, 2011.
Before Miftah-ud-Din Khan, J
Qazi Muhammad Arshad for Appellant. Atif Ali Jadoon and Abdul Wahid Jadoon for
Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 90 of 2009, decided on 8th February, 2011.Date of hearing: 8th February, 2011.
Before Miftah-ud-Din Khan, J
Qazi Muhammad Arshad for Appellant. Atif Ali Jadoon and Abdul Wahid Jadoon for
Respondents.
MUHAMMAD ILYAS---Appellant
VS
THE STATE and another---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302(b)
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Names of prosecution witnesses were mentioned in a promptly lodged report, which had excluded the possibility of consultation and deliberation---No doubt prosecution witnesses were closely related to deceased, but their presence on the spot to have witnessed the occurrence was fully established and they had furnished straightforward and truthful account of the occurrence in their testimony before the Trial Court---Said witnesses had successfully faced the test of cross-examination of defence and no material contradictions, apparent defect or infirmity existed in their testimony---No evidence existed on record that prosecution witnesses had got any personal ill-will, mala fide or ulterior motive to falsely depose against accused---Mere discrepancies of a trivial nature in the testimony of eye-witnesses, could not be considered to discard or doubt the credibility of such witnesses---Testimony of said witnesses regarding injury to the deceased, was further supported by medical evidence which was an independent and impartial piece of evidence---Alleged injury on the person of accused, was not noteworthy as the same appeared to be artificial---Medical Officer had not given any definite opinion regarding the nature of said injury---Suppression of said injury on the person of accused by prosecution witnesses, was completely ruled out, in circumstance and on that score the testimony of eye-witnesses could not be discarded or disbelieved---No convincing evidence or circumstances existed that the occurrence was the outcome of free fight between the parties---Testimony of prosecution witnesses, medical evidence, motive for the offence and incriminating recoveries established beyond doubt that accused was fully responsible for the fatal blow on vial part of the body of deceased, which caused death---Trial Court, in circumstances, had rightly convicted accused in the case. 2001 PCr.LJ 954 and 2010 SCMR 1009 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ---S. 302(b)---Qatl-e-amd---Discarding evidence of an interested witness---Scope---Evidence of an interested witness could only be discarded, if…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492